The OP’s conclusion seems to be that social AI alignment should be the main focus. Personally, I’m less convinced. It would be interesting to see more detailed arguments about the above parameters that support or refute this thesis.
Thanks for the feedback, Vanessa. I’ve just written a follow-up post to better illustrate a class of societal-scale failure modes (“unsafe robust agent-agnostic processes”) that constitutes the majority of the probability mass I currently place on human extinction precipitated by transformative AI advancements (especially AGI, and/or high-level machine intelligence in the language of Grade et al). Here it is:
I’d be curious to see if it convinces you that what you call “social alignment” should be our main focus, or at least a much greater focus than currently.
Thanks for the feedback, Vanessa. I’ve just written a follow-up post to better illustrate a class of societal-scale failure modes (“unsafe robust agent-agnostic processes”) that constitutes the majority of the probability mass I currently place on human extinction precipitated by transformative AI advancements (especially AGI, and/or high-level machine intelligence in the language of Grade et al). Here it is:
https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/LpM3EAakwYdS6aRKf/what-multipolar-failure-looks-like-and-robust-agent-agnostic
I’d be curious to see if it convinces you that what you call “social alignment” should be our main focus, or at least a much greater focus than currently.